Single sex schools are seperate schools that only invite a certain gender. That would include non-hereditary ones like lesbian and gay.

Usually, the first round would be for acceptance only, but I figured I have enough time for an argument or two. So, as usual, it is recommended that clarifications are to be made in the comment section BEFORE acceptance.

Prevention of insults

If we have single sex schools, having seperate schools, with each only inviting a specific criteria, you won't have different genders oppresing you, treating you like you're authoritatively below them. I assure you there'll be no, or less if there are really unintelligent people, people doing so, since if you opress someone for their gender, having established the fact that you're in a single sex school, you're also oppressing yourself.

Easy reserved

Say, currently, there are no single sex schools and education. In Phys Ed, you would need to construct 2 rooms, one and another being reserved for 2 genders. However, for single sex schools, in a way, in is made less difficult; There only needs to be constructed 1 locker room, being reserved for what gender that school invites only.

2nd contention isn't really as effective as the 1st, but is benefitial to the constructors.

Thank you for creating this debate, I look forward to my opponents arguments.

I will be arguing that Co-Ed schooling is equal to if not better than Uni-sex schooling.

Clarification:

Its been agreed by Pro and Con in the comments that we are arguing about whether or not It should be mandatory for schools to offer ONLY Uni-Sex Education up until Highschool.

Rebbutals:

Easy Reserved

Pro argued that schools offering only single sex education would cut down on the hastle for their Constructors, For example where in a Co-Ed with 800 students, You would need 2 locker rooms for both Sexes, however in a Uni-Sex school with 800 students you would need 1 locker room since there is only 1 Sex. Which would benefit constructors.

However this is not the case, Pro stated in the comments that only students up to highschool should be in a Single-sex school. This would mean that the 800 Students would have to move to a larger Co-Ed School which would mean more construction for constructors.

If for example you have a large Co-Ed school you do not need to switch ever. therefor minimizing the uneeded amount of construction.

Prevention of insults

Pro argued that with sex segregation we'd have no more gender opression, however gender oppression is not a big problem in schools nowadays, despite the fact that little boys think girls have cooties, and little girls think boys are gross( which they still do now D: )

Since pro has brought up insults, I will make a point about bullying. And studies have shown that Single-Sex schools have a bigger problem with bullying

Royal Society.Org states the following:

More boys in single-sex schools than boys in co-ed schools were likely to have been punched, kicked, threatened, pushed, shoved or touched in a way they did not like.

Girls in single-sex schools were more likely than girls in co-ed schools to have experienced exclusion from friendship and been ignored.

Physical bullying is worst in female-only classrooms, with the problem getting worse as children get older, according to the study. More girls and boys taught in a single-sex environment reported abuse from other pupils compared to the 90 per cent of pupils who attend co-educational schools.

Contentions:

Freedom of Choice

We Should have the freedom of choice to decide whats best for our children, There should never be only 1 way to do things, this is a very narrow minded way of thinking and not democratic at all. The education system should not just cater to Boys and Girls being seperated for unnatural reasons.

Segregating Genders is Unnatural

In the real world, Females and Males work together, so why shouldn't it be the same for education? seperating Males from Females would give them an unreal perception of how things are in the real world and thus making them more socially withdrawn and less co-operative when they are put in a situation where they are needed to work with the opposite sex. Putting Boys and girls into school with eachother at an early age, helps them develop in a way that is natural and healthy for their enviroment.

Addendum:

-I have refuted both of Pro's arguments and cited 2 websites supporting my arguments, as well as a diagram.

unfortunately Pro has failed to reply to my arguments. I will give him another chance to post his rebbutals and new arguments before adding more arguments myself. I am a bit disappointed as this would have been a fun debate.

I ask that you would not deduct points for conduct as to give Pro a chance to catch up!

---------------------------------------------------

I have refuted both of pros arguments and added 2 of my own, which are yet to be refuted

unfortunately Pro has failed to reply to my arguments. I will give him another chance to post his rebbutals and new arguments before adding more arguments myself. I am a bit disappointed as this would have been a fun debate.

I ask that you would not deduct points for conduct as to give Pro a chance to catch up!

---------------------------------------------------

I have refuted both of pros arguments and added 2 of my own, which are yet to be refuted

Yes, indeed; I am arguing that there should be offered single sex education ONLY, and ONLY invites, a specific gender.

But no, when you promote to high school, that's when both genders should be able to interact with each other. Why so? In society, meeting other genders are in a manner, inevitable. So, without the interaction and the experience of opression, you won't live properly in the real world. You need to adapt. However, as a child, you don't experience much of that in the real world. You'll find yourself with adults complimenting you, and they "go easy" on you.